passopenrecords.org

• It’s great to see elected officials holding public hearings on open records change – such as the one later today by senators Andy Dinniman (D-Chester) and Connie Williams (D-Montgomery) in Haverford.

“We need a Right-to-Know law that better acknowledges that the public has a right to know what its government is doing and how its government is spending taxpayers’ money. Our Right-to-Know law must also recognize that the public shouldn’t have to fight to get that information.” Dinniman said.

• It’s also great to see that open records is part of the political environment in this year’s elections:

Editor’s note: This is the second in a series of weekly Q&As with the four candidates running for Franklin County commissioner . . . As a commissioner, how will you improve access to public records?

Cheryl Stearn, Democrat
To have a great county government access to public records is essential. Easy access to public records not only saves time, it saves money. . . .Open dialog and access to information keeps all county residents on the same page. Without access to information, the page is blank.

Bob Ziobrowski, Democrat
Access to public records is presently in compliance with the law. Access is difficult largely because Franklin County has been slower than some counties in transitioning to electronic record keeping. . . .As commissioner, as the budget permits, I will push for a transition to as “paperless” a system as legally permissible.

Robert L. Thomas, Republican
In 2005, local governments in PA and Franklin County were secretly tested by the media for compliance of the open records law. Franklin County Government was later acknowledged by a Public Opinion editorial: “The Franklin County Commissioners provided the information that took county staff time to gather.. . . .To their credit, the commissioners obeyed the law and the information was provided.”

David S. Keller, Republican
Our county government has consistently provided access to public records upon request in a timely and professional manner, and in accordance with Commonwealth guidelines.

• And in different way, it’s great that the many doubters about how all this will REALLY play out are not holding their tongues.

When legislative leaders talk about reform, three words come up a lot: “procedure” and “access” and “openness.”

They say that judging by those criteria, the Legislature has come a long way in the last year. And, if those are your criteria, that is true.

It is far easier to get expense records for lawmakers now. We have a lobbying disclosure law that is far weaker than the federal law, but at least we finally have one.

When the House voted on a transportation bill last summer, leaders and Deputy Speaker Josh Shapiro, D-Montgomery, hailed the fact that new House rules meant House members had time to read the bill before debating it.

That didn’t used to happen, of course.

And there seems to be determination on all sides to pass a new state open records law, and to apply it to the Legislature, not just to county and municipal governments and school districts. Even better, it seems as if the new law will presume records are open – albeit with something like 26 exceptions – rather than closed, as the law presumes now.

So why do so many critics persist, and why are these actions not hailed as reform?

Because so little has changed. While lawmakers and the governor answered questions during budget negotiations, questions about whether education would get another $200 million or whether other programs would get $50 million here or $75 million there were waved off with comments like “I’m not going to get into details.” Hey, it’s not like it’s the people’s money and they might like to know, or anything. . . .The Legislature just prefers to decide how to spend your money in private.

How much change is that?